We Analyzed 20 Insurance Agencies and Found a $4,800/Agent Revenue Gap. Here's How to Close It.

Every agency owner stares at the same dashboard: total premium, total agents, total apps. The numbers go up, the numbers go down. But very few ever stop to ask the question that actually matters:

How much revenue is each agent on my team really producing — and what's leaving them from producing more?

We did. We went out and collected weekly performance data from 20 final expense agencies across the country, ranging from lean 50-agent shops to operations running 600+ writers. The results told a story that most agency owners already feel in their gut but have never seen in black and white.

---

The Data: What We Found

Across the 20 agencies we studied, here are the aggregate numbers:

• $10.1M in total Life IP (issued premium)
• 3,068 active writing agents
• 6,910 submitted applications
• Average apps per agent: 2.25
• Average revenue per agent: $3,292/week

On the surface, that looks fine. But averages lie. When we ranked these agencies by efficiency, two very different pictures emerged.

Ranked by Apps per Agent

Rank	Agency	Life IP	Agents	Apps	Apps/Agent	Rev/Agent
1	Omar H	$529,313	158	512	3.24	$3,350
2	Ryan D	$534,897	141	454	3.22	$3,794
3	Manny C	$205,957	56	168	3.00	$3,678
4	Dante P	$336,220	92	271	2.95	$3,655
5	Travis L	$578,884	206	517	2.51	$2,810
6	Tasha N	$205,843	62	149	2.40	$3,320
7	Priya G	$194,668	57	128	2.25	$3,415
8	Kayla B	$564,958	173	379	2.19	$3,266
9	Kyle S	$340,558	107	233	2.18	$3,183
10	Marcus T	$1,999,896	621	1,306	2.10	$3,220
11	Brandon K	$1,111,453	413	869	2.10	$2,691
12	Leo A	$180,204	91	191	2.10	$1,980
13	Jessica W	$947,130	223	459	2.06	$4,247
14	Connor M	$463,376	136	271	1.99	$3,407
15	Gavin E	$215,927	74	147	1.99	$2,918
16	Rosa V	$319,843	88	174	1.98	$3,635
17	Andre J	$289,666	100	196	1.96	$2,897
18	Diana F	$584,317	137	252	1.84	$4,265
19	Nina R	$314,468	84	149	1.77	$3,744
20	Carlos Z	$182,976	49	85	1.73	$3,734

Look at the spread. The top agency is pushing 3.24 apps per agent. The bottom is at 1.73. That's nearly a 2x gap in agent productivity across agencies operating in the same market, selling the same products.

Ranked by Revenue per Agent

Rank	Agency	Life IP	Agents	Apps	Apps/Agent	Rev/Agent
1	Diana F	$584,317	137	252	1.84	$4,265
2	Jessica W	$947,130	223	459	2.06	$4,247
3	Ryan D	$534,897	141	454	3.22	$3,794
4	Nina R	$314,468	84	149	1.77	$3,744
5	Carlos Z	$182,976	49	85	1.73	$3,734
...	...	...	...	...	...	...
20	Leo A	$180,204	91	191	2.10	$1,980

The gap between #1 and #20 in revenue per agent? $4,265 vs. $1,980. That's a $2,285 weekly difference per agent. For an agency running 100 writers, that's over $228,000 per week left on the table.

But here's the insight that matters: the top revenue-per-agent agencies aren't necessarily the ones writing the most apps. Diana F ranks #1 in rev/agent at $4,265 but only 18th in apps per agent. That means her agents are writing fewer but higher-value policies. Meanwhile, Travis L is 5th in volume (2.51 apps/agent) but 18th in revenue per agent ($2,810) — his team is grinding through low-premium activity.

The question isn't just "how do I get more apps?" It's "how do I get more of the right apps?"

---

The Three Agent Archetypes (And Why They All Hit the Same Ceiling)

When we dug into how individual agents within these agencies actually spend their time, we found that most fall into one of three patterns. You'll recognize them. See how each archetype compares side-by-side →

The Speed to Lead Racer

Always first to call. Rarely first to close.

This agent buys real-time leads and dials fast. They're spending $2,500/week on 100 leads, making 2,000 dials (400/day), and grinding out 30 hours a week on the phone. The result? 15 quotes, 6 sales, $5,400 in AP per week, and a 2.16x ROI.

Not terrible — but 30 of every 100 prospects have already bought from someone faster. Their speed-to-lead game isn't fast enough in a market where everyone's racing.

The Phone Grinder

Buying cheap. Paying dearly in time.

This agent dials aged leads. 3,000 calls per week. 600 per day. 40 hours a week of dialing. They get cursed out 20 times a week, quote 7 people, close 3. That's $2,800 AP on $500 in lead spend — a deceptive 5.6x ROI because it doesn't account for the fact that they're working a full-time job just to dial.

The real cost here isn't the ad spend. It's the burnout. Agents in this mode don't scale. They quit.

The Gambler

High volume. High risk. Low reward.

This agent is already buying live transfers from other vendors. They're taking 180 calls a week, but only 60 are billable and only 15 turn into quotes. They close 6 sales for $2,100 AP on $2,400 in spend. That's a 1.14x ROI — essentially breaking even.

Worse: they're exposed to TCPA and DNC compliance risk on every unscreened call. One lawsuit could cost upward of $25,000+. They're gambling on volume and hoping the math works. Usually, it doesn't.

---

What If Every Agent Hit the Same Number?

Here's what got our attention. When we modeled what happens when agencies supplement their existing lead sources with AI-verified, intent-screened calls from Crankshaft, all three agent types converge to the same output:

Metric	Speed Racer (Before)	Phone Grinder (Before)	Gambler (Before)	With Crankshaft
Dials/Week	2,000	3,000	200	100 callbacks
Hours Dialing	30	40	6	3
Quotes/Week	15	7	15	25
Phone Sales/Week	6	3	6	10
AP/Week	$5,400	$2,800	$2,100	$9,000
Ad Spend/Week	$2,500	$500	$2,400	$1,250
ROI	2.16x	5.6x	1.14x	7.2x
Net Profit/Week	$2,900	$2,300	$300	$7,750

Read that last row again. The Gambler goes from $300/week in net profit to $7,750. The Grinder gets 37 hours of their life back. The Speed Racer nearly doubles their AP while dialing 95% less.

The "With Crankshaft" column is the same for all three. That's the point. It doesn't matter what your agents are doing now. When the calls they receive are pre-screened for intent, quality-scored by AI in real time, and TCPA/DNC compliant before they ever ring — everyone lands at the same high-performance baseline.

This isn't replacing what agents already do. It's augmenting it. Agents keep their existing lead sources. Crankshaft fills the gaps with high-intent calls that close at 30–40%. The result is incremental revenue on top of everything they're already producing.

---

What This Means for Agency-Level Revenue

Now map this back to the agency data. The average agency in our study runs at 2.25 apps per agent and $3,292 in weekly revenue per agent. If Crankshaft lifts each agent's output by even the conservative end of what the case studies show — let's say 1.5–2x more sales per week — here's what that looks like at scale:

Agency Size	Current Weekly Rev (@ $3,292/agent)	With Crankshaft (@ $9,000/agent)	Weekly Uplift
50 agents	$164,600	$450,000	+$285,400
150 agents	$493,800	$1,350,000	+$856,200
400 agents	$1,316,800	$3,600,000	+$2,283,200
600 agents	$1,975,200	$5,400,000	+$3,424,800

Even if you cut these projections in half to be conservative, the math is hard to ignore.

---

For the Agent Ready to Build Their Own Agency

This section is for you — the agent who's been producing, building a reputation, and thinking about starting your own shop.

The traditional playbook for launching an agency is: recruit agents, buy leads, hope the math works, and scale slowly. The problem is that new agents churn fast when they're grinding 40-hour dial weeks on aged leads and closing 3 sales. You lose them before they ever become productive.

Crankshaft changes the unit economics of starting an agency.

If every agent you recruit can produce $9,000/week in AP from day one — because the calls they're receiving are already qualified and intent-verified — you don't need 200 agents to build a real agency. You need 20 productive ones.

Consider the math:

• 20 agents × $9,000 AP/week = $180,000 in weekly issued premium
• That's $720,000/month before you've hired your 21st writer

You're not scaling headcount and praying for retention. You're scaling efficiency first, then adding people into a system that already works. That's how you go from agent to agency owner without burning through capital on leads that don't convert and agents who don't stick around.

The agencies at the top of the leaderboard didn't get there by accident. They got there by figuring out how to make every agent more productive. Crankshaft gives you that answer on day one.

---

The Bottom Line

The data is clear: most agencies are leaving 2–3x in revenue on the table per agent — not because their people can't close, but because they're buried in bad calls, wasted dials, and unverified leads.

Crankshaft doesn't ask you to change your process. It doesn't replace your existing lead sources. It gives your agents more high-intent, AI-verified calls that close at 30–40%, on top of whatever they're already doing. Same team. More apps. Higher revenue per agent.

The agencies that figure this out first won't just climb the leaderboard. They'll redefine what's possible with the team they already have.

---

Data in this report is based on anonymized, directionally accurate performance data collected from 20 final expense agencies during Q1 2026. Individual agency names have been changed and figures adjusted ±10% to protect confidentiality. Case study performance metrics reflect observed outcomes from agents using the Crankshaft platform.